Remimazolam versus propofol for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

异丙酚 镇静 医学 荟萃分析 置信区间 不利影响 麻醉 相对风险 子群分析 内科学
作者
Eduardo Cerchi Barbosa,Paula Santo,Stefano Baraldo,Gilmara Coelho Meine
出处
期刊:BJA: British Journal of Anaesthesia [Elsevier BV]
卷期号:132 (6): 1219-1229 被引量:90
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.bja.2024.02.005
摘要

Background Propofol has a favourable efficacy profile in gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures, however adverse events remain frequent. Emerging evidence supports remimazolam use in gastrointestinal endoscopy. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares remimazolam and propofol, both combined with a short-acting opioid, for sedation of adults in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Methods We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomised controlled trials comparing efficacy-, safety-, and satisfaction-related outcomes between remimazolam and propofol, both combined with short-acting opioids, for sedation of adults undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. We performed sensitivity analyses, subgroup assessments by type of short-acting opioid used and age range, and meta-regression analysis using mean patient age as a covariate. We used R statistical software for statistical analyses. Results We included 15 trials (4516 subjects). Remimazolam was associated with a significantly lower sedation success rate (risk ratio [RR] 0.991; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.984–0.998; high-quality evidence) and a slightly longer induction time (mean difference [MD] 9 s; 95% CI 4–13; moderate-quality evidence), whereas there was no significant difference between the sedatives in other time-related outcomes. Remimazolam was associated with significantly lower rates of respiratory depression (RR 0.41; 95% CI 0.30–0.56; high-quality evidence), hypotension (RR 0.43; 95% CI 0.35–0.51; moderate-quality evidence), hypotension requiring treatment (RR 0.25; 95% CI 0.12–0.52; high-quality evidence), and bradycardia (RR 0.42; 95% CI 0.30–0.58; high-quality evidence). There was no difference in patient (MD 0.41; 95% CI –0.07 to 0.89; moderate-quality evidence) and endoscopist satisfaction (MD –0.31; 95% CI –0.65 to 0.04; high-quality evidence) between both drugs. Conclusions Remimazolam has clinically similar efficacy and greater safety when compared with propofol for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopies.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
杰杰完成签到,获得积分10
刚刚
white完成签到,获得积分10
刚刚
1秒前
耶耶发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
打打应助科研啊科研采纳,获得10
1秒前
msd2phd完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
fangzheng完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
3秒前
镜花水月完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
lu完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
CC发布了新的文献求助10
3秒前
leishenwang完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
Lg完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
4秒前
lulu完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
5秒前
浩铭完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
孙李貌发布了新的文献求助20
5秒前
洁净雨发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
molihuakai应助AA采纳,获得10
7秒前
8秒前
傅凡桃完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
8秒前
眼睛大的冰岚完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
9秒前
外星人完成签到,获得积分10
9秒前
蔡坤完成签到,获得积分10
9秒前
迷路日完成签到,获得积分10
9秒前
nofear发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
9秒前
李新颖完成签到 ,获得积分10
9秒前
jinhui完成签到,获得积分10
10秒前
糖吵粒子完成签到,获得积分10
10秒前
10秒前
10秒前
迪士尼王子完成签到 ,获得积分10
11秒前
11秒前
zhang发布了新的文献求助10
12秒前
12秒前
褪色发布了新的文献求助10
13秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
Developing Genetic Editing Tools for Lysobacter 2000
Adhesion Science: Principles & Practice 800
Signals, Systems, and Signal Processing 610
IEST-RP-CC018: Cleanroom Cleaning and Sanitization: Operating and Monitoring Procedures 600
Fundamentals of Pharmaceutical and Biologics Regulations: A Global Perspective, Second Edition 600
近红外光谱定性分析原理、技术及应用 500
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 纳米技术 工程类 有机化学 化学工程 生物化学 计算机科学 物理 内科学 复合材料 催化作用 物理化学 光电子学 电极 细胞生物学 基因 无机化学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 6531524
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 8324120
关于积分的说明 17823255
捐赠科研通 5632843
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2932769
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1909422
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1768618